Legal Update for July 2018
News Article: Re Ellenborough Park Case and Its Impact on Property Law
The ongoing Supreme Court appeal concerning recreational property rights, first established in the Re Ellenborough Park case of 1956, is currently undergoing significant developments in 2025. This landmark case is shaping the future of property law, particularly in cases involving recreational use.
Recent commentary and case law developments indicate a reaffirmation and application of the Re Ellenborough Park criteria in current property disputes. For instance, in July 2025, courts have been considering rights that satisfy these criteria, such as the accommodation of the dominant tenement, a crucial factor in establishing easements involving recreational use.
The expected impact of these contemporary Supreme Court deliberations is a clearer, possibly more refined framework for deciding when recreational rights attached to property can legally be treated as easements. This reinforces the importance of the dominant/servient tenement relationship and whether the rights "accommodate" the dominant land—key factors from Re Ellenborough Park that courts are still applying today.
Although no final decision or major overturn has been reported as of late July 2025, legal analysts note that the ongoing judgments might influence lower courts' future approaches, particularly regarding recreational rights' registration and classification. This may also impact practices in jurisdictions using similar property laws, as seen in contexts like the Cayman Islands where similar issues arose and were resolved in light of the Re Ellenborough Park principles.
Meanwhile, the Court of Appeal's judgment in the Mastercard litigation has provided useful guidance for managing the balance between group-wide risk management and legal separation between group companies. The decision favours claimants in follow-on damages claims, making England a preferred jurisdiction for competition law claims.
In another development, a case discussed how to ensure that internal investigations comply with the stringent new data protection regime under the GDPR when potential wrong-doing is discovered in the business. Compliance with the GDPR during internal investigations requires careful consideration and planning to avoid potential fines.
The law firm represented premium activewear brand LNDR in an IP dispute against Nike over Nike's use of 'LDNR' in a recent advertising campaign. The team successfully argued that LNDR was distinctive as a trade mark and that consumers would be confused into thinking Nike were collaborating with LNDR.
The latest ruling on parent company liability provides guidance for multinationals on managing risks from overseas subsidiaries. The judgment in the Mastercard litigation was a victory for the retailers bringing the claims, and the Supreme Court's decision in the appeal is expected to bring clarity to the application of the test for determining when a recreational right can qualify as an easement.
In summary, the Supreme Court's ongoing deliberations on the Re Ellenborough Park case are reaffirming and refining the key principles established in 1956. The expected outcome will provide a clearer framework for determining when recreational rights can be treated as easements, impacting property law in England and potentially other jurisdictions. Meanwhile, the Mastercard litigation is cementing England's position as a preferred jurisdiction for competition law claims, and the LNDR case is setting precedents for IP disputes involving social media evidence.
- As the Supreme Court's Re Ellenborough Park case deliberations continue to impact property law, business entities may now seek expertise in competition law for dispute resolution in England.
- Simultaneously, wealth-management firms and individuals investing in personal-finance matters must stay apprised of these court developments to ensure compliance with the emerging framework regarding easements in recreational right cases.
- In the realm of finance and investing, multinational businesses would benefit from wealth-management strategies that consider the latest rulings on parent company liability and account for risks from overseas subsidiaries.
